Epstein Secrets

ge Other Predicate Acts 16 C. The FAC Fails to Meet the Twombly/Igbal Standard 18 D. The Claim Is Barred by the Statute of Limitations 19 E. The Court Does Not Have Jurisdiction Over Defendants 21 F. Venue Is Improperly Laid in the Southern District of New York 22 CONCLUSION 22 EFTA00307097 Defendants Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") and

tate a claim sounding in fraud, a plaintiff must plead, among other things, that she reasonably relied on the alleged misrepresentation. Crigger v. Fahnstock & Co., Inc., 443 F.3d 230, 234 (2d Cir. 2006). The FAC does not meet this basic requirement. Instead, the FAC merely states in conclusory terms that "Pla

f the specific factual allegations necessary to establish what Epstein or=actually did during that limitations period to violate the statute. III. The Court Does Not Have Jurisdiction Over Defendants The Complaint alleges without elaboration that Defendants are residents of New York. Cplt. ¶ ¶ 4, 8. However, the Complaint alleges no facts to

tate a claim sounding in fraud, a plaintiff must plead, among other things, that she reasonably relied on the alleged misrepresentation. Crigger v. Fahnstock & Co., Inc., 443 F.3d 230, 234 (2d Cir. 2006). The Complaint does not meet this basic requirement. Instead, the Complaint merely states in conclusory ter

cifying what Epstein or actually did to violate the statute. Doc. # DC-10084480 v.8 EFTA00298463 Brad Edwards, Esq. May , 2017 Page 10 III. The Court Does Not Have Jurisdiction Over Defendants The Complaint alleges without elaboration that Defendants are residents of New York. Cplt. II 4, 8. However, the Complaint alleges no facts to supp

tate a claim sounding in fraud, a plaintiff must plead, among other things, that she reasonably relied on the alleged misrepresentation. Crigger v. Fahnstock & Co., Inc., 443 F.3d 230, 234 (2d Cir. 2006). The Doc. # DC-10084480 v.8 EFTA00298457 Brad Edwards, Esq. May , 2017 Page 4 Complaint does not meet